Jagtar Singh vs Bhajan Singh and others

K. Kannan, J.—The civil revision is filed against the order of the Appellate Court allowing the interim application for injunction declined by the trial Court. The suit was for the bare relief of injunction based on title and reference had been made for entries in khasra girdawari from the year 1982. The interim application was, however, dismissed by the trial Court on its finding that the plaintiff had deliberately suppressed the fact that the defendant had moved an application for correction of khasra girdawari and the proceedings are still pending. The Appellate Court reversing the judgment of the trial Court has held that mere fact of pendency of proceedings before the Revenue Authority ought not to be a ground for rejection and relied on judgment of this Court in Sham Sunder and others Vs. Ram Kumar and others 1993 (3) SLJ 3128. Learned counsel states that the trial Court had dismissed the application only on observing the conduct of the plaintiff in suppressing the fact of pendency of proceedings. If the pending proceedings would be totally irrelevant in the decision referred to above, non-disclosure of such fact ought not to be taken as material. I do not find that there is any error of jurisdiction or a patent illegality committed by the Appellate Court for subjecting the order for interference in revision petition.

The revision petition is accordingly dismissed.